OBJECTIVES: Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI is not available in all imaging centres to investigate adnexal masses. We proposed modified magnetic resonance (MR) scoring system based on an assessment of the enhancement of the solid tissue on early phase postcontrast series and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map and investigated the validity of this protocols in the current study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional retrospective study, pelvic MRI of a total of 245 patients with 340 adnexal masses were studied based on the proposed modified scoring system and ADNEX MR scoring system. RESULTS: Modified scoring system with the sensitivity of 87.3% and specificity of 94.6% has an accuracy of 92.1%. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ADNEX MR scoring system is 96.6%, 91%, and 92.9%, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the modified scoring system and ADNEX MR scoring system is 0.909 (with 0.870-0.938 95% confidence interval [CI]) and 0.938 (with 0.907-0.961 95% CI), respectively. Pairwise comparison of these area under the curves showed no significant difference (P = .053). CONCLUSIONS: Modified scoring system is less sensitive than the ADNEX MR scoring system and more specific but the accuracy is not significantly different. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: According to our study, MR scoring system based on subjective assessment of the enhancement of the solid tissue on early phase postcontrast series and DWI with ADC map could be applicable in imaging centres that DCE is not available.

2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague 116 36 Czech Republic

Advanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center School of Medicine Tehran University of Medical Sciences Tehran 1419733141 Iran

Advanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center Tehran University of Medical Science Tehran 141973141 Iran

Advanced Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Research Center Tehran University of Medical Sciences Tehran 1419733141 Iran

Department of Gynecologic Oncology Women Yas Hospital Complex Tehran University of Medical Science Tehran Iran

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al.Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136(5):E359-E386. PubMed

Coccia ME, Rizzello F, Romanelli C, Capezzuoli T.. Adnexal masses: what is the role of ultrasonographic imaging? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;290(5):843-854. PubMed

Meys EM, Kaijser J, Kruitwagen RF, et al.Subjective assessment versus ultrasound models to diagnose ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2016;58:17-29. PubMed

Froyman W, Landolfo C, De Cock B, et al.Risk of complications in patients with conservatively managed ovarian tumours (IOTA5): a 2-year interim analysis of a multicentre, prospective, cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(3):448-458. PubMed

Alcázar J, Pascual M, Graupera B, et al.External validation of IOTA simple descriptors and simple rules for classifying adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48(3):397-402. PubMed

Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, et al.Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(4):327-340. PubMed

Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A, et al.Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2011;305(22):2295-2303. PubMed

Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Ryan A, et al.Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10022):945-956. PubMed PMC

Borley J, Wilhelm‐Benartzi C, Yazbek J, et al.Radiological predictors of cytoreductive outcomes in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. BJOG. 2015;122(6):843-849. PubMed

Menon U, Griffin M, Gentry-Maharaj A.. Ovarian cancer screening—current status, future directions. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(2):490-495. PubMed PMC

Forstner R, Sala E, Kinkel K, Spencer JA.. ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up. Eur Radiol. 2010;20(12):2773-2780. PubMed

Anthoulakis C, Nikoloudis N.. Pelvic MRI as the “gold standard” in the subsequent evaluation of ultrasound-indeterminate adnexal lesions: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(3):661-668. PubMed

Bernardin L, Dilks P, Liyanage S, Miquel ME, Sahdev A, Rockall A.. Effectiveness of semi-quantitative multiphase dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a predictor of malignancy in complex adnexal masses: radiological and pathological correlation. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(4):880-890. PubMed

Dilks P, Narayanan P, Reznek R, Sahdev A, Rockall A.. Can quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI independently characterize an ovarian mass? Eur Radiol. 2010;20(9):2176-2183. PubMed

Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H.. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of ovarian tumors: differentiation of benign and malignant solid components of ovarian masses. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34(2):173-176. PubMed

Thomassin-Naggara I, Toussaint I, Perrot N, et al.Characterization of complex adnexal masses: value of adding perfusion-and diffusion-weighted MR imaging to conventional MR imaging. Radiology. 2011;258(3):793-803. PubMed

Thomassin-Naggara I, Aubert E, Rockall A, et al.Adnexal masses: development and preliminary validation of an MR imaging scoring system. Radiology. 2013;267(2):432-443. PubMed

Pereira PN, Sarian LO, Yoshida A, et al.Accuracy of the ADNEX MR scoring system based on a simplified MRI protocol for the assessment of adnexal masses. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2018;24(2):63-71. PubMed PMC

Ruiz M, Labauge P, Louboutin A, Limot O, Fauconnier A, Huchon C.. External validation of the MR imaging scoring system for the management of adnexal masses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:115-119. PubMed

Sasaguri K, Yamaguchi K, Nakazono T, et al.External validation of ADNEX MR SCORING system: a single-centre retrospective study. Clin Radiol. 2019;74(2):131-139. PubMed

Sadowski EA, Thomassin-Naggara I, Rockall A, et al.O-RADS MRI risk stratification system: guide for assessing adnexal lesions from the ACR O-RADS committee. Radiology. 2023;308(1):204371. PubMed

Mohamadian A, Moradi B.. Simplified approach for ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system MRI risk stratification system. Korean J Radiol. 2022;23(11):1115-1117. PubMed PMC

Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne T, Collins W, Verrelst H, Vergote I.. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16(5):500-505. PubMed

Hottat N, Van Pachterbeke C, Vanden Houte K, Denolin V, Jani J, Cannie M.. Magnetic resonance scoring system for assessment of adnexal masses: added value of diffusion‐weighted imaging including apparent diffusion coefficient map. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021;57(3):478-487. PubMed

Kurman RC, Herrington CS, Young RH.. WHO Classification of Tumours of Female Reproductive Organs. 4th ed. International agency for research on cancer publications; 2014.

Wengert GJ, Dabi Y, Kermarrec E, et al.; EURAD Study Group. O-RADS MRI classification of indeterminate adnexal lesions: time-intensity curve analysis is better than visual assessment. Radiology. 2022;303(2):E28. PubMed

Vargas HA, Woo S.. Quantitative versus Subjective Analysis of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI for O-RADS? Radiological Society of North America; 2022:213103. PubMed

Ruiz M, Labauge P, Louboutin A, Limot O, Fauconnier A, Huchon C.. External validation of the MR imaging scoring system for the management of adnexal masses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:115-119. PubMed

Basha MAA, Abdelrahman HM, Metwally MI, et al.Validity and reproducibility of the ADNEX MR scoring system in the diagnosis of sonographically indeterminate adnexal masses. Magn Reson Imaging. 2021;53(1):292-304. PubMed